Menu

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

This is the end of the semester so we (the School of Cognitive Science) are ending our Wednesday lunch talks with an open-ended discussion (and a bang!). I'm guilty of organizing the panel, but there are others who will have interesting things to say. If you are in the area, join us at Hampshire College at Noon. Here are the details:

"The Phenomenon of ISIS Through the Lens of Cognitive Science: A Panel Discussion"

Abstract: The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) declared itself to be a worldwide Caliphate in 2014. Through brutal violence and a savvy media campaign, ISIS has been able to grab worldwide reaction. Perceptions about ISIS - some real and some imaginary - are now playing a crucial role in US domestic and foreign policy. But beyond politics, how do we understand the phenomenon of ISIS in the broader contexts of international terrorism and global conflict? Why do some individuals in different countries desire to joinISIS? What is the role of media in the creation of both the ISIS spectacle and some of its anti-Muslim backlash? Can the field of cognitive science offer some insights? Join us at this informal panel discussion on questions about ISIS that are relevant to cognitive science.

In The Adele Simmons Hall (ASH) Lobby
A light lunch will be available at noon

Friday, April 24, 2015

This is an incredibly sad day. Sabeen Mahmud, the director of an incredibly amazing place of culture and science, T2F, was shot dead today. I know that Sabeen Mahmud was behind all sorts of cultural activities in Karachi. I would just add that she was a phenomenal supporter of science as well. I first met her in the early 1992, when she helped us in organizing International Space Year Activities. She was still a teenager at the time. But more recently, our urdu astronomy series Science ka Adda (sciencekaadda.com) came out of conversations with her and Zakir Thaver (her organization PeaceNiche is listed as one of the sponsors of the videos). She was an astronomy enthusiast and got tremendous pleasure in knowing about the enormous scale of the universe. I'm sure the universe misses her enthusiasm and her lively indomitable spirit. I'm still gathering my thoughts - and will have more to say later. In the mean time here is a short clip where you can hear Sabeen talking about T2F and on fear in Karachi:

Since she was killed right after hosting a panel on Baluchistan, there is a justified speculation about the role of ISI in silencing her. Here is a short piece that looks at her killing and state terrorism:

Many liberals on social media have condemned the attack and placed the blame on state agencies. This was responded by others who protested that these are unfair accusations being cast with complete lack of evidence. While it is too soon to know for certain who was behind Sabeen’s murder, this cowardly act is the perfect time to talk about the role of state terrorism.

One of the most common responses to accusations against ISI responsibility is why would ISI kill Sabeen Mahmud when they could have killed Mama Qadeer? The answer to this is obvious: Killing Mama Qadeer would make a martyr for Baloch separatists. Killing Sabeen Mahmud sends a message to the rest of us not to ask questions about Balochistan. And why not? Why should we not ask questions?

The answer lies in the very subject of the talk that got Sabeen killed. Human rights organisations across the world have reported on kidnapping, torture, and murder of Baloch by Pakistan armed forces and intelligence agencies. Our own Supreme Court has been forced to threaten contempt proceedings against the government for failing to comply with orders on missing persons. When agencies think it will be good to kill Mama Qadeer, they will kill Mama Qadeer.

But I want to leave you with two things. One a post about T2F from 2 years ago that linked to an NPR story about this coffee shop. And two, a Bruce Springsteen song because Sabeen absolutely loved Springsteen! She lived a full life and enjoyed every second of it. I'm glad to have had the chance to meet with her on several occasions. Here is the post from January 2013:

I have been lucky to have given three talks at one of the coolest cafes in Pakistan: The Second Floor (T2F). I have always found the atmosphere electric and a very high level of questions and discussions. One of the persons behind T2F is Zaheer Kidvai - and I have known him since 1989-90. He helped and guided us in organizing AMASTROPAK - our nascent amateur astronomical society in Karachi. In fact, he provided us with some space in his office as well.

A little over a year ago, Sabeen went to a Bruce Springsteen concert and she wrote this on her Facebook page:

Apologies for all the hyperbole that shall follow but there is no way to describe a live Bruce Springsteen experience without excessive verbal indulgence. Bruce is a powerhouse of raw, unbridled energy. At 64, he has the tightest, sexiest ass I’ve ever seen and a lean, hungry body that brings to life the notion of strapping your hands 'cross his engines. He burst onto the stage at 7:15 pm and did not stop leaping, bounding, running, and being all kinds of awesome, until 10:30 pm. 3 hours and 15 minutes. Non-stop. Who does that anymore? In a world of synthesised, over-produced, stage-managed shit, a Bruce Springsteen concert is pure, unadulterated, old-fashioned (but not cheesy) rock and roll at its wondrous, glorious best. The way he enunciated that he is "a prisoner of the everlasting eternal ass-kicking power of rock and roll” … oh god, my heart stopped for a nanosecond. He makes every single moment count. Every single moment is special.
...
I was reminded starkly, of what really matters and what’s important. My politics were reinforced. I made leaps of faith in my head all over again. Bruce Springsteen’s music has defined my life - my hopes, dreams, aspirations and struggles. To be in the same space as him was nothing short of magical.

This just gives a small glimpse of the liveliness of Sabeen. Since she explicitly mentioned Springsteen's Hungry Heart at one point in her post, I will post a live version here. Here is Boss for you Sabeen:

This panel seeks to transcend the focus on political and strategic concerns that has often dominated the treatment of the rise of IS/ISIS/ISIL in the media and bring some critical nuance and historical context to the way this phenomenon is generally discussed. Four scholars from Boston University will present (Kecia Ali, Michael Pregill, Tom Barfield, and Noora Lori) and four scholars from other institutions in the Boston area will respond (Jessica Stern, Franck Salameh, Mia Bloom, and Ken Garden).

This is the inaugural event associated with Mizan, the new digital scholarship initiative headed by Michael Pregill, Interlocutor of the Institute for the Study of Muslim Societies and Civilizations. We hope that those of you in the Boston area will be able to join us for what is sure to be an informative and stimulating conversation!

When: Thursday, April 23, 2015 @ 4:00 to 6:30 PM

Where: Pardee School of Global Studies, 121 Bay State Road, First Floor

This event is free and open to the public. Please RSVP to smscinst@bu.edu

If you live in the Boston area, come to the panel.

One of the panelists is Kecia Ali. She has a nuanced and interesting take on both ISIS and its critics. Here is a short piece by her, ISIS and Authority, where she addresses Graeme Wood's now (in)famous Atlantic article What ISIS really wants:

Though Wood grants that most Muslims do not support ISIS, and acknowledges in passing the role of interpretation in formulating its doctrines, the overall impression conveyed by the article was that Muslims who deny that ISIS is a fair representation of Islam are either apologists or simply do not really know anything about Islam. Others have offered rebuttals of many of the points in the article, and Bernard Haykel, the scholar quoted, has offered a more nuanced articulation of his views. More than one commentator has pointed out that by treating ISIS as a legitimate representative of the Islamic tradition, seriously religious and dedicated to the texts “shared by all Sunni Muslims,” it fosters an unholy convergence of interests between extremist Muslims and Islamophobes.

Wood is right about some things and wrong about others. ISIS is laying claim to the tradition and the texts they cite are in what we may call the canon. Still, to quote approvingly and without clarification Haykel’s contention that “these guys have just as much legitimacy as anyone else,” seems quite a stretch. To be sure, it is not the job of religious studies scholars (or U. S. presidents) to judge which groups are “Islamic” or “un-Islamic.” Rather, we must understand how various actors make claims to represent, understand, or further their tradition. That does not mean there are no distinctions that can be made, no criteria by which to situate those religious claims in a historical and social framework.

Some attempts to assess ISIS’s legitimacy have focused on the fact that reputable Muslim authorities – clerics, scholars, ‘ulama – uniformly distance themselves from ISIS and condemn its brutal tactics. Though unwilling (for sound theological reasons) to declare leaders or followers of the Islamic State apostates, some have been willing to describe its actions as sinful, evil, or even “un-Islamic.”

But these arguments from authority worry me too. When women do something “impermissible” – lead Friday prayer, open a Women’s Mosque, interpret the Qur’an in feminist ways – self-described “traditional” Muslims offer similar condemnations: these acts, and these actors, are outside the pale of tradition. Regardless of the sophistication of the arguments presented, the response is that those who make them are not properly trained. What authority do they have? In sum: how dare they?

These specious criticisms are nearly impossible to counter, even when those spouting them do not necessarily offer more nuanced or methodologically sophisticated answers. The simple appeal to widespread scholarly agreement leaves me unconvinced.

And here is her central point on tradition and authority:

The most troubling thing about the Atlantic article is the static definition of tradition that Wood uses. In his view, tradition is a body of texts. Legitimacy emerges from texts. Practices consonant with the texts – or that are interpreted as being so – are therefore “Islamic.” Muslims who say otherwise – as he admits the overwhelming majority do when confronted with ISIS – do not have much ground to stand on. But the rejection of ISIS on the basis of its distance from the classical tradition and its unacceptability to contemporary scholars who claim to constitute the legitimate inheritors of that tradition is not a panacea either. Too frequently, the weapon of “scholarly consensus” has been wielded against Muslim women who overstep its bounds—not, as ISIS has done, in a quest for domination, but in a quest for dignity.

Saturday, April 18, 2015

Here is the second part of Pervez Hoodbhoy's video on Abdus Salam (see the first part here). This directly deals with science and religion. In particular it focuses on the belief and unbelief of Salam and Weinberg, respectively, and on how they both still reached the same conclusions about the electroweak unification theory that got them the Nobel prize. The sentiment here is on the separation of science and religion - something that I also happen to agree with (though inspiration for science can indeed come from religion).

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

It seems that the movement against the construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) on Mauna Kea, Hawaii, is growing (see this post from last Thursday). The governor of Hawaii has now postponed the construction until April 20th. On Sunday, there were more protests against the construction on both the Big Island and Oahu. Even Drogo from the Game of Thrones, Jason Momoa, is part of the protests:

On Monday, a few hundred students and faculty staged a walkout at University of Hawaii against the telescope.

The walkout happened at noon with students and professors, many from the Hawaiian Studies program. After leaving their classes the protestors met at the Campus Center to stage a rally. Protestors battled passing rain showers during the rally which lasted approximately 60 minutes. Both students and professors were unhappy with the university’s lack of responsiveness to their concerns over the construction of the state of the art telescope.

At noon, hundreds gathered for a system-wide walk-out in front of UH Manoa’s campus center, saying the telescope is unnecessary and offensive to Native Hawaiians.

It was organized by the Pūkoʻa Council, the university’s Native Hawaiian council, which features representatives from all 10 system campuses.

“The Board of Regents or the Office of Mauna Kea Management can no longer speak on behalf of the entire University for this issue. As we’ve seen in the past week, opposition to this issue is widespread and this includes opposition within the University itself. The Board of Regents needs to know this as do the TMT investors,” said UH Manoa representative for the Pūkoʻa Council, Dr. Lilikala Kameʻeleihiwa.

The Pūkoʻa Council said it expressed opposition to the TMT project when representatives met with UH president David Lassner at Kapiolani Community College on April 6 and asked that construction be halted.

“The combination of, how do you bridge western science with tradition and Hawaiian knowledge, is to really listen to native people who really understand Hawaii, who really understands the geography of this land and the stories of this land,” said Kaneohe resident Keali’i’olu’olu Gora.

The Thirty Meter Telescope consortium has launched an online campaign to counter these protests with a hashtag #WeSupportTMT. I think for the past seven years, the TMT folks had managed PR well, but they certainly have been caught off-guard with the current protests and are now playing catch-up. Here is the TMT website that provides clarification to many of the objections. The website has some issues as well. For example, the TMT site highlights an 1874 quote from King Kalākaua in support of astronomy on the island. I remember seeing that quote at the Imiloa Astronomy Center in Hilo, Hawaii. I visited there a few years ago with my friend and historian of native religions, Tracy Leavelle. Tracy was furious because a quote from an Hawaiian authority was being appropriated selectively while ignoring other Hawaiian authorities who may have been more critical of US presence on the island. The TMT issue is not just about science. It is seeped in political and cultural history of Hawaii and astronomers have to be sensitive to those issues beyond simply a "check-box" approach.

I will leave you here first with a video of protest on the Big Island, and then below of protests in Honolulu:

Friday, April 10, 2015

If you discover an asteroid, you get a chance to name it. The International Astronomical Union (IAU) gives it the official recognition. It is fantastic that Dr. Amy Mainzer decided to name Asteroid 316201 after Malala. Now we can say that Malala also lives in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter (far far away from the Taliban) and orbits the Sun every 5 and a half years (and will probably keep on orbiting the Sun for a few billion years).

It is a great honor to be able to name an asteroid after Malala. My postdoctoral fellow Dr. Carrie Nugent brought to my attention the fact that although many asteroids have been named, very few have been named to honor the contributions of women (and particularly women of color.

I've been an astronomer at JPL for about 10 years now, and it was my life's dream to be a scientist.

My advice to young girls is that science and engineering are for everyone! We desperately need the brainpower of all smart people to solve some of humanity's most difficult problems, and we can't afford to reject half the population's. Plus, it is a wonderful feeling to learn about the world around you – it's a job you will fall in love with each day.

Carrie and I read about Malala's amazing story and thought that if anyone deserves to have an asteroid named after them, she does!Thank you very much for your work at the Malala Fund – it is inspiring to see all the great things that you all have done.

(Bold emphasis in original).

And what does the asteroid look like? It is about 4 km in diameter and it has a dark surface. Here is an image of the asteroid along with the description provided by Dr. Mainzer:

The formal designation of the asteroid is 316201 Malala, or 2010 ML48. The asteroid is the red dot in the upper right of the image. This is an infrared image of the asteroid, which means we are sensing the heat it emits rather than the sunlight it reflects off its surface.

The stars appear blue in this image because they are extremely hot, thousands of degrees, whereas the asteroid is much cooler, so it appears red. Just as the hottest flames are blue, hotter temperatures appear as blue in this image, and cooler ones are red.

From the heat emitted, we can also determine the size and reflectivity of the asteroid. It is about 4 kilometers in diameter, and its surface is very dark, the color of printer toner.This particular asteroid was discovered by our team using a space telescope that orbits the Earth; it is called NEOWISE. I am the principal investigator of the mission.

And here is Malala's rough orbit and you can find more technical details about it here.

But overall, this is a nice and thoughtful gesture. Thanks to Amy and Carrie!

The telescope construction was supposed to start last week, but the protestors blocked the path to the site. Thirty of the protestors were arrested. Here is the news story about it and the footage of the actual arrests. While the arrests are terrible, it is touching to see cops first embracing the protestors before handcuffing them:

After these arrests, the protest gained even more momentum. And now the governor of Hawaii has asked everyone to take a "timeout" and has halted construction of TMT for a week:

Gov. David Ige announced Tuesday that construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope atop one of the most sacred sites for native Hawaiians would come to a halt, at least temporarily. Ige characterized the one-week pause in construction as a “timeout.”

“There will be no construction activities this week,” the governor told reporters. “This will give us some time to engage in further conversations with the various stakeholders that have an interest in Mauna Kea and its sacredness and its importance in scientific research and discovery going forward.”

Reaction from native Hawaiians to Ige’s announcement was unmistakingly skeptical. Kahookahi Kanuha of Kailua-Kona believes the pause in construction of the telescope is a delay tactic.

"They are looking for us to leave,” he said Tuesday in an interview with Oiwi TV. “The more down time they have, the more they think that we'll have to go back to work and go back to our kuleana (responsibilities). And the truth of the matter is we do. However, many of us are willing to drop that kuleana because those are jobs and this is our responsibility."

TMT project manager Gary Sanders issued a statement shortly after the governor’s announcement to clear up what he says are misconceptions about the project.

"The TMT site was selected with great care and respect," Sanders wrote. “There are no archaeological shrines or burial sites within TMT's project site. Comprehensive research by expert hydrologists confirm there is no threat to the aquifer. TMT agrees with Governor Ige's request for a timeout this week and an ongoing dialogue on issues."

A group calling itself the Sacred Mauna Kea Hui released a statement of its own, saying the governor’s timeout should be made permanent, and that Ige should use the pause in construction to examine possible breeches of public trust.

"Although the Sacred Mauna Kea Hui appreciates a welcome reprieve from the desecration of our sacred mountain summit and endangerment of our fresh water aquifer and endangered species environment, we know that these are still in danger unless a permanent moratorium is obtained,” the statement read. “This reprieve will also give the multi-billion dollar international TMT corporation, which has been allowed to circumvent the law, time to begin its process of identifying a new location outside of Hawaii for their TMT project.”

I was trained as an astronomer and have used a telescope on Mauna Kea. But my sympathies here are largely with the Hawaiians. There is too much injustice and toxic history linked to American actions in Hawai'i. Yes, astronomers had nothing to do with what happened in the late 19th or in the first half of the 20th century. But the large visible observatory domes (they were never supposed to be so prominent on the mountain), for some Hawaiians, did become a reminder of earlier US actions. I think most astronomers have failed to appreciate these historical injustices. Nor have astronomers fully realized the enormous power differential between the marginalized Native Hawaiian groups and state backed universities as well as state agencies like NASA. The TMT, after all, is a $1.4 billion project! To add to all this complexity, the project will and does bring a lot of money to this poor state.

But money is not the issue. The TMT folks did have a sophisticated team that spent seven years clearing all sorts of hurdles and court cases. But the process is not really the issue - even though that is what the protestors are focusing on. The battle over TMT is really about cultural identity and historical injustices. Money cannot erase those concerns and a compromise will be hard to find.

All said, I don't think TMT will be stopped - there is just too much state power behind them. But I just hope that when astronomers use any of the telescopes on top of Mauna Kea, they realize and appreciate that their presence on the mountain and their use of the telescopes is rightfully hurting at least some Hawaiians.

In the mean time, lets see how the drama over TMT construction unfolds.

If interested, here is the letter sent to the governor of Hawaii by the opponents of the telescope:

And here is the TMT response to some of the claims made by the protestors:

There have been inaccurate claims made about the project recently. The most common is that TMT is a danger to the Maunakea aquifer and drinking water on Hawaii Island. Comprehensive research by expert hydrologists confirms that TMT and the existing 13 telescopes pose no such danger. Furthermore, TMT is designed to be a zero waste discharge facility with all waste securely transported off the summit. There is also very little precipitation above 8,000 feet and the observatories are located well above that at the top of Maunakea at 14,000 feet.

Another claim is that TMT did not meet the eight criteria for a conservation district use permit issued by the Hawaii Board of Land and Natural Resources in 2011. The Third Circuit Court ruled that TMT did meet the criteria by being consistent with state laws governing the districts, not causing substantial adverse impact to existing natural resources, being compatible with the surrounding area, preserving the existing physical and environmental aspects, not subdividing or increasing the intensity of the land use and not being materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. State regulations specifically identify astronomy as a permitted use in the Maunakea Science Reserve.

Friday, April 03, 2015

Why is there a crater named Sinbad on Saturn's moon Enceladus? Is there an underwater ocean on Enceladus and what are the chances of life existing on such a moon? In this episode of Science ka Adda (SkA), we talk about the connection between The Arabian Nights: Tales from a Thousand and One Nights and one of the most mysterious, interesting, and puzzling objects in our solar system. Here is the episode:

Thursday, April 02, 2015

Things are turning darker still in Bangladesh. Just this past month, an American-Bangladeshi atheist blogger, Avijit Roy, was killed in Dhaka (see The killing in Bangladesh for unbelief and in the US for a particular belief). Now we have Washiqur Rahman who was killed couple of days ago after an attack with knives and meat-cleavers. I don't know if the similar manner of the two killings (machete and meat cleavers/knife) is meant to send an extra message about the brutality of the killers or may be it is just a matter of convenience. But the heartlessness and brutality, nevertheless, comes through. From BBC:

Mr Rahman was killed on a busy street in Dhaka. Two of the suspected attackers, armed with meat cleavers, were caught near the scene.

The suspects told police they had targeted Mr Rahman because of his anti-Islamic writing, a police official told the Associated Press news agency.

Mr Rahman blogged under a pen-name, Kucchit Hasher Channa, or Ugly Duckling. According to the Dhaka Tribune newspaper, he had criticised irrational religious beliefs.

Imran Sarker, the head of a network of activists and bloggers in Bangladesh, told AFP news agency that Mr Rahman was "a progressive free thinker".

Asif Mohiuddin, a Bangladeshi blogger who survived an attack in 2013, said he had often talked to Mr Rahman about "criticising fundamentalist groups".

"I liked him for his satire, his sense of humour. He was a wonderful blogger and I'm very... upset right now," he said.

Last month's attack on Mr Roy prompted massive protests from students and social activists, who accused the authorities of failing to protect critics of religious bigotry.

Lets hope the government steps in to curb these killings and that it doesn't turn into a systematic purge of secularists in Bangladesh.

As shocking as Rahman's death was, the reaction from some quarters was equally disturbing.

On his Facebook page (for which he picked a custom URL that translates to "unbeliever"), Rahman had posted a picture with the hashtag #IamAvijit.

After his death, someone left a comment, "Now you are."

Another wrote, "I felt sorry when I first learned of your death. But then I saw what you wrote and I am not."

On his page, Rahman reposted a cartoon depicting Prophet Mohammed from the French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo. He wished a happy birthday to author Taslima Nasreen, who was forced to flee Bangladesh due to death threats from fundamentalists. And he "liked" a picture of sausages wrapped in crescent rolls that someone had captioned, "Pigs in burqas."

Posts threatening him were numerous.

"Get ready for the afterlife," one person commented on one of his posts."See you in hell," said another.

Absolutely shameful. But then it is often not about the content but broader political/cultural animosity:

The irony is that the people who killed Rahman weren't even familiar with his writings; they were simply following orders, police said.

Of the three involved in the Monday morning attack, two were quickly caught by bystanders.

In confessions to police, the pair -- both students at Islamic schools -- said they didn't know what a blog was, nor had they seen Rahman's writing.

They said they were acting on orders from another person who told them killing Rahman was a religious duty, Police Commissioner Biplob Kumar Sarkar told reporters.The third person is still to be apprehended.

That appears to be par for the course in the killings of bloggers in Bangladesh.The only person arrested in the killing of Roy, the U.S. blogger, is Farabi Shafiur Rahman, who had called for his death in Facebook posts.

There has been no conviction in the January 2013 attack on Mohiuddin.And no convictions in yet another case -- the hacking death of blogger Ahmed Rajib Haider, also in 2013.

"The Bangladeshi government must urgently establish accountability in this murder case and others," the Committee to Project Journalists said after Rahman's death. "Otherwise the rest of the country's bloggers, commentators and journalists covering sensitive topics remain at grave risk of being attacked as well."

And these bloggers are in many ways vulnerable to this kind of violence:

Bloggers, unlike political parties, aren't an organized force -- and that makes them an easy target for radicals, said Imran Sarker, who heads the Blogger and Online Activists Network in Bangladesh.

"They want peace, they talk of humanity. If you strike them with stones, they don't strike back. They try to reach you with flowers," he said. "So, if you want to sow fear and stifle progressive thought, they are easy to pick on."

But the deaths -- of Rahman, of Roy, of Haider -- have emboldened the movement, rather than chill them into silence.

"No one is cowering in their homes because this is happening. Because this has been happening regularly for a long time," he said. "We want to take the society forward. We know we have a lot left to accomplish."

“But I should be very sorry if an interpretation founded on a most conjectural scientific

hypothesis were to get fastened to the text in Genesis,” wrote the devout Christian physicist James Clerk Maxwell to a friend in 1876. “The rate of change of scientific hypothesis is naturally much more rapid than that of Biblical interpretations, so that if an interpretation is founded on such a hypothesis, it may help to keep the hypothesis above ground long after it ought to be buried and forgotten.” Maxwell's words were characteristically subtle. His first sentence suggests that his major concern was in protecting the integrity of Biblical scriptures, implying that serious damage could occur should these texts be linked to speculative scientific hypotheses that subsequently proved untenable. His second sentence, however, strongly suggests that any such bonding of conjectural scientific hypothesis to scriptural text would actually damage the progress of science.

But then the book deals with the shift from a theistic science to a naturalistic one - and it is here that Huxley - and the new professional class of "scientists" becomes important. But I also appreciate the explicit mention of the disconnect of theistic science of 19th century with the contemporary Intelligent Design (ID) movement:

With a long line of mainstream scientific practitioners, including Isaac Newton and Robert Boyle, theistic science, in recent decades, has been much investigated by historians. Natural philosophers regarded the laws of nature as divinely established for the orderly governance of the world, sustained as uniform and unchangeable, except by God's will. Rightly undertaken in a spirit of humility, scientific investigation was believed to reveal these laws to humankind, along with the manifold benefits that such knowledge of the natural order could provide. Thus, the uniformity of nature, resting upon faith in a divine being who never acted arbitrarily, made possible the advance of human science. Stanley argues that traditional theistic science is radically different from the present-day theory of “Intelligent Design,” which, he emphasizes, lies outside mainstream science and refuses to acknowledge methodological principles such as the uniformity of nature and the provisional character of scientific knowledge.

Challenging the values of theistic science, Thomas Huxley represented a new and ambitious generation of scientists who interpreted uniformity as naturalistic rather than theistic. According to Stanley, Huxley believed that “one could only assume uniformity if there was no active deity able to disrupt natural processes.” Huxley had rich cultural resources on which to draw to challenge the established views. For example, Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology offered a compelling model that explained Earth's history using only observable agents such as water and heat.

Stanley's book draws upon a wealth of recent scholarship on Victorian science and religion. It is also extremely well grounded in a variety of primary texts, including private correspondence, public lectures, and published scientific papers. Its primary goal—to demonstrate how the scientific enterprise gradually shifted from a theistic to a naturalistic approach—is impressively pursued.

You can read the full review here (though you may need subscription to access it).

EMAIL SUBSCRIPTIONS

What is Irtiqa?

Irtiqa is Salman Hameed's blog. A few years ago (before Facebook killed many of the blogs), it used to track stories of science & religion, especially those related to Muslim societies. That is still one of its foci, but now it dovetails more of Salman's interests including film, astronomy, science fiction, and science outreach in both Pakistan and the US.

Irtiqa literally means evolution in Urdu. But it does not imply only biological evolution. Instead, it is an all encompassing word used for evolution of the universe, biological evolution, and also for biological/human development. While it has created confusion in debates over biological evolution in South Asia, it provides a nice integrative name for this blog. For further information, contact Salman Hameed.

The blog banner is designed by Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad. You can find all his creative endeavors at Orangie.

Salman Hameed

Salman is an astronomer and Associate Professor of Integrated Science & Humanities at Hampshire College, Massachusetts. Currently, he is working on understanding the rise of creationism in contemporary Islamic world and how Muslims view the relationship between science & religion. He is also working with historian Tracy Leavelle at Creighton University to analyze reconciliation efforts between astronomers and Native Hawaiians over telescopes on top of sacred Mauna Kea in Hawaii. He teaches “History and Philosophy of Science & Religion” with philosopher Laura Sizer, and “Science in the Islamic World”, both at Hampshire College. Salman and Laura Sizer are also responsible for the ongoing Hampshire College Lecture Series on Science & Religion, and you can find videos of all these lectures below. Contact information here.